for he is attempting to obtain an advanced suit must prevail. It is for him to decide degree in education, to become, by defini- in which direction his advantage lies." tion, a leader and trainer of others. Those who will come under his guidance and influence must be directly affected by the education he receives. Their own education and development will necessarily suffer to the extent that his training is unequal to that of his classmates. State imposed restrictions which produce such inequalities cannot be sustained." [339 U. S. 637, 70 S.Ct. 853.] The recent case of McKissick v. Charmichael, 4 Cir., 187 F.2d 949, 953, wherein the question of admission to the law school of the University of North Carolina was decided follows and amplifies the reason. ing of the Sweatt and McLaurin cases. In the McKissick case, officials of the State of North Carolina took the position that they had adopted a fixed and continued purpose to establish and build up separate schools for equality in education and pointed with pride to the large advances that they had made. They showed many actual physical accomplishments and the establishment of a school which they claimed was an equal in many respects and superior in some respects to the school maintained for white students. The Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in this case, speaking through Judge Soper, meets this issue without fear or evasion and says: "These circumstances are worthy of consideration by any one who is responsible for the solution of a difficult racial problem; but they do not meet the complainants' case or overcome the deficiencies which it discloses. Indeed the defense secks in part to avoid the charge of inequality by the paternal suggestion that it would be beneficial to the colored race in North Carolina as a whole, and to the individual plaintiffs in particular, if they would cooperate in promoting the policy adopted by the State rather than seek the best legal education which the State provides. The duty of the federal courts, however, is clear. We must give first place to the rights of the individual citizen, and when and where he seeks only equality of treatment before the law, his In the instant case, the plaintiffs produced a large number of witnesses. It is signi ficant that the defendants brought but two. These last two were not trained educators. One was an official of the Clarendon schools who said that the school system needed improvement and that the school officials were hopeful and expectant of obtaining money from State funds to improve all facilities. The other witness, significantly named Crow, has been recently employed by a commission just established which, it is proposed, will supervise educational facilities in the State and will handle monies if, as and when the same are received sometime in the future. Mr. Crow did not testify as an expert on education although he stated flatly that he believed in separation of the races and that he heard a number of other people say so, including some Negroes, but he was unable to mention any of their names. Mr. Crow explained what was likely and liable to happen under the 1951 State Educational Act to which frequent reference was made in argument on behalf of the defense. It appears that the Governor of this state called upon the legislature to take action in regard to the dearth of educational facilities in South Carolina pointing out the low depth to which the state had sunk. As a result, an act of the legislature was adopted (this is a part of the General Appropriations Act adopted at the recent session of the legislature and referred to as the 1951 School Act). This Act provides for the appointment of a commission which is to generally supervise educational facilities and imposes sales taxes in order to raise money for educational purposes and authorizes the issuance of bonds not to exceed the sum of $75,000,000, for the purpose of making grants to various counties and school districts to defray the cost of capital improvement in schools. The Commission is granted wide power to accept applications for and approve such grants as loans. It is given wide power as to what schools and school districts are to receive monies and it is also provided, of segregation, itself, had a deleterious that from the taxes there are to be allo- and warping effect upon the minds of cated funds to the various schools based children. These witnesses testified as to upon the enrollment of pupils. Nowhere their study and researches and their acis it specifically provided that there shall tual tests with children of varying ages be equality of treatment as between whites and they showed that the humiliation and and Negroes in the school system. It is disgrace of being set aside and segregatopenly and frankly admitted by all parties ed as unfit to associate with others of that the present facilities are hopelessly different color had an evil and incradicadisproportional and no one knows how ble effect upon the mental processes of much money would be required to bring our young which would remain with them the colored school system up to a parity and deform their view on life until and with the white school system. The estim- throughout their maturity. This applics ates as to the cost merely of equalization to white as well as Negro children. These of physical facilities run anywhere from witnesses testified from actual study and forty to eighty million dollars. Thus, the tests in various parts of the country, inposition of the defendants is that the rights cluding tests in the actual Clarendon School applied for by the plaintiffs are to be de- district under consideration. They shownied now because the State of South Caro- ed beyond a doubt that the evils of segrelina intends (as evidenced by a general gation and color prejudice come from earappropriations bill enacted by the legisla- ly training. And from their testimony as ture and a speech made by its Governor) well as from common experience and to issue bonds, impose taxes, raise money knowledge and from our own reasoning. and to do something about the inadequate we must unavoidably come to the conclu schools in the future. There is no guar- sion that racial prejudice is something antee or assurance as to when the money that is acquired and that that acquiring is will be available. As yet, no bonds have in early childhood. When do we get our been printed or sold. No money is in the first ideas of religion, nationality and the treasury. No plans have been drawn for other basic ideologies? The vast number school buildings or order issued for ma- of individuals follow religious and polititerials. No allocation has been made to cal groups because of their childhood trainthe Clarendon school district or any other ing. And it is difficult and nearly imposschool districts and not even application sible to change and eradicate these carly blanks have, as yet, been printed. But ac- prejudices, however strong may be the cording to Mr. Crow, the Clarendon au- appeal to reason. There is absolutely no thorities have requested him to send them reasonable explanation for racial prejublanks for this purpose if, as and when they dice. It is all caused by unreasoning emocome into being. Can we seriously contional reactions and these are gained in sider this a bona-fide attempt to provide early childhood. Let the little child's mind equal facilities for our school children? be poisoned by prejudice of this kind and these impressions however many ycars he it is practically impossible to ever remove may have of teaching by philosophers, religious leaders or patriotic citizens. segregation is wrong then the place to stop it is in the first grade and not in graduate colleges. On the other hand, the plaintiffs brought many witnesses, some of them of national reputation in various educational fields. It is unnecessary for me to review or analyze their testimony. But they who had made studies of education and its effect upon children, starting with the lowest grades and studying them up through and into high school, unequivocally testified that aside from inequality in housing appliances and equipment, the mere fact If From their testimony, it was clearly apparent, as it should be to any thoughtful person, irrespective of having such expert testimony, that segregation in educa tion can never produce equality and that it is an evil that must be eradicated. This case presents the matter clearly for adjudication and I am of the opinion that all of the legal guideposts, expert testimony, common sense and reason point unerringly to the conclusion that the system of segregation in education adopted and practiced in the State of South Carolina must go and must go now. Segregation is per se inequality. As heretofore shown, the courts of this land have stricken down discrimination in higher education and have declared unequivocally that segregation is not equality. But these decisions have pruned away only the noxious fruits. Here in this case, we are asked to strike its very root. Or rather, to change the metaphor, we are asked to strike at the cause of infection and not merely at the symptoms of disease. And if the courts of this land are to render justice under the laws without fear or favor, justice for all men and all kinds of men, the time to do it is now and the place is in the elementary schools where our future citizens learn their first lesson to respect the dignity of the individual in a democracy. To me the situation is clear and important, particularly at this time when our national leaders are called upon to show to the world that our democracy means what it says and that it is a true demooracy and there is no under-cover suppression of the rights of any of our citizens because of the pigmentation of their skins. And I had hoped that this Court would take this view of the situation and make a clear cut declaration that the State of South Carolina should follow the intendment and meaning of the Constitution of the United States and that it shall not abridge the privileges accorded to or deny equal protection of its laws to any of its citizens. But since the majority of this Court feel otherwise, and since I cannot concur with them or join in the proposed decree, this opinion is filed as a dissent. OUR COMMUNITY: SEVEN CRITICAL PROBLEMS FACING US By FRANCIS A. KORNEGAY Executive Director Detroit Urban League Life without struggle is life loaded with stagnation. This refers to peoples all over the world. The freedoms that mankind have earned were born in the eternal furnace of struggle. Moreover, that freedom is permanent or static is deception of the first magnitude. Because growth is continuous so is freedom. "The way to preserve freedom is to live it."1 Gains made today may be stumbling blocks tomorrow. Inherent in freedom is the freedom of choice the right to succeed and its attending right to fail; the right to do and the right not to do; the right to live and the right to die. It is the goal of society that mankind will always choose to do that which is right, honest, and just. But then Thomas Jefferson, in his immortal words embedded in the Declaration of Independence, so ably put it "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men deriving their just power from the consent of the governed." May I quote again, "The 'Negro Problem' is the most conspicuous area for dramatic new advance."2 It is about these rights that I share with you some of my concerns and projections. It is because of the denial of these rights to some American citizens, although more than 186 years have passed since the utterance of these pronouncements, that I list for you Seven Critical Problems facing us: (The way in which the problems are discussed, today, in no way indicates their severity.) PROBLEM MIGRATION WILL REMAIN "The migration of people is not peculiar to Negroes. However, due to unbearable economic pressures, and ma 1Goals For Americans, p. 1; Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1960. 2Ibid., p. 42. lignant social forces in southern states, the movement of Negroes across state lines is higher than that any other racial group."3 During the last decade, the south lost 1,445,000 Negroes who settled in the Northeast, North Central Region and in the West. According to the 1960 census figures, there were 300,506 Negroes in Detroit in 1950, but in 1960, there were 482,223, an increase of 181,717, or 29.9%. A few questions will show the type of problems that migration brings to any city: What types of skills do migrant Negroes bring? Do they possess the kind of skills, such as possessed by electricians, plumbers, engineers, technicians, professionally trained, etc., in which there are shortages? Or, do they come as unskilled workers — adding to already too large unemployed labor force of unskilled workers? Do these migrants come with sufficient savings so that they can immediatedly purchase homes? Or, do they come undereducated, thus causing a dilution of existing education programs? These are real problems. Yet, freedom of movement is a constitutional grant and right. "The adjustment to community life in a strange place is not easy for migrants. These people need help, understanding, and guidance as they are exposed, in every way, to a new environment which is culturally and industrially different from whence they have come. The migration of any people is a cultural crisis, a cultural explosion thrust upon metropolitan cities without the community climate or recources ready to effectuate a smooth and orderly transition. Migration is a process of passing through the crisis of rebirth."4 It is said that some migrants possess skills needed for the labor market. In such cases if hiring is done on the basis of merit and fairness such talents can be quickly utilized, and the community resources greatly enhanced. Moreover, Detroit must plan training programs whereby in-migrants can develop their talents into marketable skills. Here, again, public and private planning groups must realize and recognize that at the roots of the economic adjustment of the migrants is racial discrimination in employment. Public and private agencies must re-evaluate and re-access the problem of migration. We must get under one umbrella, all of the community resources at the port of entrance, so that these newcomers will not be allowed to drift, and add to our current social-ills. 3Un-Met Social Problems (Editorial by Francis A. Kornegay, Michigan Chronicle, January 25, 1961). |